Former EDL leader ‘seriously interfered’ with process of justice by filming defendants
Tommy Robinson faces prison again after being found in contempt of court for “aggressively confronting and filming” defendants in a criminal trial and broadcasting the footage on social media.
The former leader of the English Defence League (EDL) – whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – could be imprisoned for up to two years in relation to the incident in 2018, when he filmed defendants accused of the sexual exploitation of young girls.
The footage, in breach of a reporting ban, was then livestreamed from outside Leeds crown court while the jury was considering its verdict.
Robinson, 36, from Luton, Bedfordshire, had denied any wrongdoing, insisting that he had only referred to information that was already in the public domain.
However, judges at the Old Bailey on London said on Friday that his conduct “amounted to serious interference with the administration of justice”.
One of the judges, Dame Victoria Sharp, said he had breached reporting restriction imposed on the trial by livestreaming the video from outside the public entrance to the court and by “aggressively confronting and filming” some of the defendants.
“In our judgment, the respondent’s conduct in each of those respects amounted to a serious interference with the administration of justice,” she said.
Next Thursday has been set as a provisional date for his sentencing, depending on the availability of a medical expert.
Outside the Old Bailey, where hundreds of supporters of the anti-Muslim activist had been gathering since morning, police drew batons as some rushed security barriers when news of the verdict filtered through.
Addressing supporters after he left the court, Robinson said the verdict was wrong, adding: “I’ve been convicted ’cos of who I am, not what I’ve done.”
An application to have him committed to prison was made by the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, who said after the hearing: “Posting material online that breaches reporting restrictions or risks prejudicing legal proceedings is a very serious matter and this is reflected in the court’s decision today.
“I would urge everyone to think carefully about whether their social media posts could amount to contempt of court.”
Earlier, judges were told by lawyers for Cox that Robinson’s “whole objective” was to “get the defendants’ faces out there”.
Andrew Caldecott QC told the judges that a security officer at Leeds crown court said he had suggested Robinson should check at the court office for reporting restrictions.
The “critical question” was why Robinson “declined the invitation to take this obvious step which would have put the matter beyond doubt”.
Caldecott added: “We say the answer clearly is that he made a reckless assumption as to what he might be able to do because it suited him to do so, and the reason it suited him to do so was that his whole objective was to get the defendants’ faces out there.”
He said Robinson had taken a gamble by referring to details in previous reports of the Huddersfield grooming case, which had been published before the reporting ban.
“Mr Yaxley-Lennon did find the Huddersfield Examiner online and he took a punt that because the names and the charges had been out there earlier, he took a punt on being able to get away with mentioning them to give necessary context to the people he was filming.”
Robinson had broadcast the footage – which was viewed online 250,000 times after being livestreamed on Facebook - on 25 May 2018. A reporting restriction was in place which postponed the publication of any details of the case until the end of a series of linked trials involving 29 people, in an attempt to ensure all received a fair trial.
Robinson had been arrested, charged and sentenced to 13 months after being found in contempt of court but served just two months before being freed after the court of appeal overturned the finding of contempt last August.
The case was then referred back to the attorney general, who announced in March that it was in the public interest to bring fresh proceedings.